tv [untitled] December 8, 2011 9:30am-10:00am PST
resolution? i think there is some gray area here that needs to be worked out how they could use the assistance of the commissioner has well as the department. l about we do that? >> i will say this. i see the issue that commissioner dejesus has raised. it is still up to the commission to what they should do. if there is confusion with the issue, and if he has a dual roles, have to figure that out. it is still an issue that has to be dealt with. if you don't want to do that,
that is fine. but at some point, you're going to have to -- because it is under our purview, all right? that issue will still have to be dealt with to provide direction for what the department will do anyway. we're dodging that decision tonight, it is fine. >> i don't know that we are dodging a decision, unless there is an issue that needs to be worked out. i agree with you. i was on the commission back when we started discussing the patrol special, but there is some area of clarification. i don't think that we can work those out in the midst of this particular dispute. this dispute needs to be taken off to the side, and we need to deal with the issues as the u.s. suggested. i am not trying to dodge is, i
just don't think it is appropriate to move forward with some much lingering doubt as to what the gray areas are. and have this particular matter judged. >> these things come out in these cases, i disagree, but there are six of us. >> she has never participated in the settlement discussions on this case. >> i would like to know what you think about it because you were in there. >> i am concerned -- concerned in terms of settlement. if i am understanding history correctly on this case, it has been the whose series of negotiations and to settlement agreements that were negotiated by counsel for the assistant patrol officer special and the
department. the second one was more favorable for the assistant patrol special hot desert. and ultimately, neither went throughout because they weren't satisfactory. i think you heard assistant patrol special officer indicate what wasn't satisfactory to him. so this is a new day. we can go forward with new negotiations. and so there is that. in terms of my feedback on each of these specifications, that is a different matter. i don't know if that is what you are asking, commissioner marshall, or not. was your question directed the
just towards a settlement discussions? >> i don't know that the settlement discussion resolved what she brought up, as all i am saying. she brought up an issue, i don't know of any kind of discussion will deal with that. it is still out there. >> since the commissioners have spent time going through the documentation, her that we move on to our closed session and give the department and the assistant patrol special the opportunity. the chief is here. they can see if there is some headway that you can make, because it is a new day. see if there is grounds here for a satisfactory settlement. and if not, we will deliberate
on the case tonight. is that satisfactory? >> i can live with that. >> let's move away from line item #4 and moved to line item #6, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 8 below, closed session. any public comment regarding movement to close session? please call line item number seven? >> a vote on whether to hold item eight in closed session. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor. >> is anonymous.
session. >> i will move to vote in favor of nondisclosure. all in favor? could you please call dodge returned back to line item #4 regarding the matter of ernest takihara. >> to sustain or not sustain charges. and to decide penalty of necessary. >> i understand there was a resolution reached outside. and that needs to be put into writing and scheduled for another date, is that correct? >> we're working on the parameters. >> you will agree to this disposition reached outside and you will not go sideways on us with that, will you? you will agree to the disposition you agreed to, you will not change your mind, are you? >> yes, sir. >> this matter is off calendar. >> can we schedule this for
january 4 to come back? >> that is the next regular meeting. >> january 4? >> yes. >> thank you. >> item 10, adjournment. >> do i have a motion? >> so moved. all in favor? >> we have already had public comment. >> we conducted public comment. do we have a second? >> it is the last meeting of the year. and so if we could indulge in 10 minutes? i would be supportive of that. >> it is not on the agenda, we have had public comment. >> we can always reopened. -- reopen.
>> can't we reopen public comment for five minutes? >> i have to tell you that i understand the occupy san francisco movement and they have a right to speak. also we entertain public comment and we also had, and during the chief's report. i understand it have something to say but we have a process here. it is only fair to everybody. tif a vote is needed, we will take about. >> do we have a motion to adjourn? >> we have -- could open public comment. >> if we adjourn i will stay and just care about. >> i would like if anybody knows
it, the president and vice president or the secretary may have the answer to this from a legal standpoint. i want to know, do we have the authority or the discretion to be able to reopen public comment without running afoul of brown, sunshine, whenever. >> we reopen all the time. it is a matter of discretion. >> but keep it brief and let's not start calling names or hurling accusations. let's be factual. >> think you very much. -- thank you very much. i move to reopen public comment. we had a second. >> second. >> do we have a vote? >> aye. >> aye.
>> aye. >> aye. >> no. >> public comment was two minutes. >> so, good evening. i am with the chinese progress of association and i am here with representatives from different community organizations, labor unions and other folks who are concerned about the 99% here in san francisco and the struggle people are facing with home foreclosures and unemployment. health care, all the things i think you are familiar with. we're here tonight because we were part of a process with the mayor's office to try to ensure the first amendment rights and the right to freedom of assembly for occupy san francisco protesters and anyone who wanted to join the movement would be respected and a different path would be taken here as compared to oakland and other places.
he gave us his command that -- commitment. we could disagree on the issue of pants. he was committed to the right to protest in justin herman plaza and other public spaces. he had no issue with the protests and supported the spirit of the movement and what the message to not be lost in battles over police and other issues. we're concerned of what happened tonight. it is a departure -- departure from the city policy. if there is -- has been a change or if there is actions being taken that are not being run by the mayor, or what happened, a peaceful assembly, hundreds of protesters who gathered at justin herman plaza and went to hold a general assembly, they're talking about different issues and went into the park and proceeded to begin, there were many gathered around.
we had a peaceful assembly and we were surrounded and they decided to arrest. >> good evening. i have been a teacher in san francisco for 25 years. the political director of the united educators of san francisco. we came to the demonstration tonight to voice our support for occupy, articulating the concern of the 99% who are being denied basic services and the most precious is our students and we no classes are overcrowded. we came to peacefully assemble this evening. the president of our union, but tell me out there, we saw peaceful demonstrators articulating their first amendment right surrounded by the police. what we noticed is a much more aggressive stance by the police. we also heard a demonstration of 100 occupiers this afternoon,
the police showed mounted -- mounted police showed up. we were very concerned there was a change in tone. demonstrators were peaceful. it was not a lot of aggression coming from the occupied side and the supporters. and the town from the police was dramatically different. at least from our perspective. we're glad the city stepped back and we're glad the people got the opportunity to leave and make him did not break out. the police wound up backing up and that is a good thing. we want to make sure that the police chief, the commissioners and the mayor returned to san francisco values and sometimes it is tough to defend people's first amendment rights but the educators of san francisco insist this is our city. this is a city we love. we have to work together to maintain it as the city of st. francis. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker? >> i am a member of the san francisco veterans affairs commission and a member of the
citizens against the war. my concern is is a public when it is convenient for the city and corporations? what makes it a problem for people to be out in the park if they want to protest? it is our right to assemble at what the police to respect that. it is in our constitution. i will continue to fight for it as long as we have this right. thank you. >> thank you. >> i am here with power, people organized to win appointment rights. there are members who were there for the assembly. our concern is this type of activity, this extreme police response had a chilling effect. we all know that the 99% movement is capturing thousands of people because it is speaking to real issues. we're having foreclosures, the issues of joblessness, the fundamental core issues of
economic justice. what is most important is that -- this kind of intimidation that keeps people from their rights to speak about important issues that are changing the course of the country in a positive direction are speaking about the struggles of everyday people. when this type of thing happens, fox went down there to have a regular meeting. there were discussing everyday issues that affect people's lives and the impact was massive of having those people detained, surrounded, and not able to leave. the threat of arrest. we're grateful that was turned around. some. a statement coming from the city that says this city protect the right to first amendment and respect people's right to assembly. that will not -- i agree with what was said. the mayor has stated this was a protective right 24-7 and we need to see the actions of the police department also in line with that. thank you. >> thank you. any other speakers?
thank you for coming forward. thank you for the professionalism you showed and the courtesy and last time we had a visit, people were not paying attention to the rules. thank you and especially you for your service. we appreciate it. the chief will tell you this is a first amendment city. we protect your first amendment rights. we realize there is parameters with everything. there is always rules and we try to do the best you can. this chief is working hard to facilitate what is taking place. thank you for coming. anything you like to add? >> it is taken care of. thank you. >> if anyone would like to make a motion for adjournment? so moved. >> seconded. >> without objection. >> i object. [laughter]
away. this is one of them. >> an icon of the new deal. >> we stood here a week ago and we heard all of these dignitaries talk about the symbol that coit tower is for san francisco. it's interesting for those of us in the pioneer park project is trying to make the point that not only the tower, not only this man-built edifice here is a symbol of the city but also the green space on which it sits and the hill to which is rests. to understand them, you have to understand the topography of san francisco. early days of the city, the city grows up in what is the financial district on the edge of chinatown. everything they rely on for existence is the golden gate. it's of massive importance to the people what comes in and out of san francisco bay. they can't see it where they are. they get the idea to build a giant wooden structure.
the years that it was up here, it gave the name telegraph hill. it survived although the structure is long gone. come to the 1870's and the city has growed up remarkably. it's fueled with money from the nevada silver mines and the gold rush. it's trying to be the paris of the west. now the beach is the suburbs, the we will their people lived on the bottom and the poorest people lived on the top because it was very hard getting to the top of telegraph hill. it was mostly lean-to sharks and bits of pieces of houses up here in the beginning. and a group of 20 businessmen decided that it would be better if the top of the hill remained for the public. so they put their money down and they bought four lots at the top of the hill and they gave them to the city. lily hitchcock coit died without leaving a specific use for her bequest. she left a third of her estate for the beautify indication of the city.
arthur brown, noted architect in the city, wanted for a while to build a tower. he had become very interested in persian towers. it was the 1930's. it was all about machinery and sort of this amazing architecture, very powerful architecture. he convinced the rec park commission that building a tower in her memory would be the thing to do with her money. >> it was going to be a wonderful observation place because it was one of the highest hills in the city anywhere and that that was the whole reason why it was built that high and had the elevator access immediately from the beginning as part of its features. >> my fear's studio was just down the street steps. we were in a very small apartment and that was our backyard. when they were preparing the site for the coit tower, there was always a lot of harping and
griping about how awful progress was and why they would choose this beautiful pristine area to do them in was a big question. as soon as the coit tower was getting finished and someone put in the idea that it should be used for art, then, all of a sudden, he was excited about the coit tower. it became almost like a daily destination for him to enjoy the atmosphere no matter what the politics, that wasn't the point. as long as they fit in and did their work and did their own creative expression, that was all that was required. they turned in their drawings. the drawings were accepted. if they snuck something in,
well, there weren't going to be any stoolies around. they made such careful little diagrams of every possible little thing about it as though that was just so important and that they were just the big frog. and, actually, no one ever felt that way about them and they weren't considered something like that. in later life when people would approach me and say, well, what did you know about it? we were with him almost every day and his children, we grew up together and we didn't think of him as a commie and also the same with the other. he was just a family man doing normal things. no one thought anything of what he was doing. some of them were much more highly trained.
it shows, in my estimation, in the murals. this was one of the masterpieces. families at home was a lot more close to the life that i can remember that we lived. murals on the upper floors like the children playing on the swings and i think the little deer in the forest where you could come and see them in the woods and the sports that were always available, i think it did express the best part of our lives. things that weren't costing money to do, you would go to a picnic on the beach or you would do something in the woods. my favorite of all is in the staircase. it's almost a miracle masterpiece how he could manage to not only fit everyone, of course, a lot of them i
recognized from my childhood -- it's how he juxtaposed and managed to kind of climb up that stairway on either side very much like you are walking down a street. it was incredible to do that and to me, that is what depicted the life of the times in san francisco. i even like the ones that show the industrial areas, the once with the workers showing them in the cannery and i can remember going in there and seeing these women with the caps, with the nets shuffling these cans through. my parents had a ranch in santa rosa and we went there all summer. i could see these people leaning over and checking. it looked exactly like the beautiful things about the ranch.
i think he was pretty much in the never look back philosophy about the coit. i don't think he ever went to visit again after we moved from telegraph hill, which was only five or six years later. i don't think he ever had to see it when the initials are scratched into everything and people had literally destroyed the lower half of everything. >> well, in my view, the tower had been pretty much neglected from the 1930's up until the 1980's. it wasn't until then that really enough people began to be alarmed about the condition of the murals, the tower was leaking. some of the murals suffered wear damage. we really began to organize getting funding through the arts commission and various other sources to restore the murals. they don't have that connection or thread or maintain that
connection to your history and your past, what do you have? that's one of the major elements of what makes quality of life in san francisco so incredible. when people ask me, and they ask me all the time, how do you get to coit tower, i say you walk. that's the best way to experience the gradual elevation coming up above the hustle and bustle of the city and finding this sort of oasis, if you will, at the top of the hill. when i walk through this park, i look at these brick walls and this lawn, i look at the railings around the murals. i look at the restoration and i think, yeah, i had something to do with that. learning the lessons, thank you, landmarks meet landmarks. the current situation at
pioneer park and coit tower is really based in public and private partnership. it was the citizens who came together to buy the land to keep it from being developed. it was lily hitchcock coit to give money to the city to beautify the city she loved of the park project worked to develop this south side and still that's the basis of our future project to address the north side.